Sabitlenmiş Tweet
I'm honestly baffled by how even some of the smartest people in AI, crypto, and tech seem completely out of touch with how the average person on the consumer market actually thinks.
if you've been paying attention to the public reaction towards AI and crypto over the past few years, there's an evident pattern of hate.
do you know why?
because the people building these technologies often only talk about them purely from the perspective of innovation. they see better infrastructure, greater efficiency, lower costs, new possibilities, and naturally conclude that everyone else should be excited too.
tech and finance bros are honestly way too linear, simplistic, and even predictable.
thing is; that's not how the mass market evaluates change and innovation.
99.9999% of people don't wake up asking themselves whether a new technology is objectively superior most of them rather ask a much simpler question: what does this mean for the life I already know?
that distinction is something a lot of founders, investors, and technologists underestimate.
had to pull this idea from @RobertGreene's The 48 Laws of Power. he argues that if you want people to embrace change, you shouldn't appear to be destroying tradition. instead, you should respect what came before while gradually introducing something new.
whether you agree with the book or not, if you've spent enough time on the consumer market, there's a lot of truth in that observation.
many innovators approach disruption as though the old system deserves to be ridiculed. Banking is obsolete. Education is broken. Jobs will disappear. AI will replace this. Crypto will replace that.
from the perspective of someone inside the industry, or course, these statements are exciting. they represent progress.
most often, a lot of these people intentionally do that for their personal interests. raise money, pump their investments, highlight their products, etc.
but from the perspective of everyone else, they genuinely sound like threats.
thing is, most people don't have the same emotional relationship with technology that builders do.
the majority of the consumer market have emotional relationships (take note on the key term: emotional) with stability, familiarity, routines, careers, and institutions they've relied on for years.
now, when you position your innovation as something that invalidates all of those things overnight, don't be surprised when the first reaction is resistance.
I think this explains why both AI and crypto receive so much public backlash despite having genuinely transformative potential.
I've spent more than 5 years of my personal time in crypto to confidently say that it have incredible infrastructure for payments, settlement, and global finance.
AI may fundamentally improve productivity across almost every profession too. those things can all be true.
but one thing that most builders understand is that adoption has never been determined solely by technological merit.
most often than not, it actually depends on whether people feel psychologically safe enough to embrace the change you're trying pursue.
that's the part many innovators, yes, even the smartest ones often fail to realize.
The real challenge is:
1. building technology that's objectively better.
2. introducing change at a pace and in a way that acknowledges the emotional reality of the people you're asking to change.
everyone is pontifying "cracked" founders as a result of overly-romanticized hustle culture prompted by social media.
but notice how the best businessmen operates. they may not know a lot of things but they understood one thing deeply.
people.
English
